dad kills family after getting drunk

“He believed she may have been cheating on him — possibly with more than one person,” a law-enforcement source said. “He went and got drunk that night before heading home.”

After pounding drinks, Walker skipped his nightclub-security gig Friday evening. Flowing with liquid courage, the murderous man showed up at around 5:30 a.m. Saturday morning, where he methodically executed 7-year-old daughter Kayla and badly wounded her 12-year-old sister, Christina.

Walker then went to another bedroom and fatally shot Hale, 31, and her mother, Viola Warren, before committing suicide in his parked car at JFK Airport.

http://nypost.com/2015/01/26/dad-who-massacred-family-thought-baby-mama-was-cheating/

just putting it out there - If he went to a store and got high instead of drunk, I bet no one would have died. Free cannabis!

true, if he got high he would have just eaten a bag of doritos, cried a bit and then had a long fruitless wank before going to bed…

I’m guessing that somebody who has the moral wherewithal to kill his family, probably wouldn’t have any qualms about illegally buying untaxed weed.

Your logic is flawed the fk off Itera!

ie, “You better legalize weed or else I’ll murder my family.”

This thinking is extortion at best. How about you don’t murder your family whether drunk or not!

I can just see another one, “Man drives drunk due to high Uber prices.” Shame on Uber, right?!

i’m with itera on this

There was a clip of Grace from Fox arguing with 2 chainz about legalization and using violent weed anecdotes. But events like this just somehow bypass the forum of public debate.

Dude, who cries on pot?

"Wait… what was I going to do with this gun, again??

Oh look!!! A cheeseburger!"

Just because one bad thing is legal does not mean we should legalize all other bad things that are slightly less bad.

No but it does mean that you should either choose to legalize the less bad things within the same class or examine banning the worse of the items. Particularly when your arguments for the two are logically incompatible. So we either ban alchohol for its health and societal dangers or we legalize pot based on the fact that it poses a better risk profile. Otherwise counter arguments by people who drink are hippocritical and idiotic at best.

A completely logically incongruous legal framework is nobody’s friend.

Nah, when you ban a substance it obviously reduces violence because everyone obeys the law and doesn’t use that substance and just becomes a calm, model citizen. Remember in history class when they talked about banning alchohol during the 20s? Everybody got sober, stopped fighting, worked hard and generated one of the most prosperous times in US history: the 1920s. They should just ban everything that is moderately bad for you and we could all live in a utopia.

I can’t tell if you’re disagreeing with me or agreeing.

Because to me this is the main argument for legalizing pot. We have a significant amount of societal and economic costs as well as needless violence from attempting to enforce a similar ban on pot despite it having a better risk profile than alchohol. Since we assume it doesn’t make sense to go back on the ban on alchohol, why are we continuing to maintain a relatively stupid ban on weed upheld on scarecrow and boogyman arguments?

If anything I think there’s a certain amount of cultural bigotry involved. There is a statistically higher cost of the ban for african american communities. If we tried to reinforce the ban on alchohol all of the sudden rich white ladies like Amazing Grace would be full of cohesive and logically sound arguments for why that’s a bad idea because their cocktail hour would be threatened. Any mention of the ~11 thousand drunk driving deaths or alchohol driven violence would be countered with mention of individual rights. But mention pot and everybody does a few stretches and gets ready to start climbing their ivory tower.

Ban caffiene, makes people too hyper. If we banned caffiene everyone would just relax and the world would be a better place.

Ban everything except for boiled vegetables, brown rice and water.

I think we’re in agreement.

bwyf for president!

Though I would suggest banning water too, people drown.

To be clear I’m not suggesting a blanket ban, I must be having a slow morning because I’m confused.

This thread is getting incomprehensible… must be all the posters who are high on pot.

sar·casm ˈsärˌkazəm/ noun

  1. the use of irony to mock or convey contempt

Boiled veggies lose a lot of their vitamins and minerals. Much better to steam them.

Some legal and bad things are legal due to “stickiness”. Let’s say cigarettes are an example. We could say cigarettes should be banned due to health reasons. However, cultural stickiness keeps them legal. Just because a policy change is difficult to implement does not mean that the status quo is optimal.

Along the same lines, the fact that cigarettes are legal does not mean this is a desirable policy that should be extrapolated to other harmful substances.